Realignment talk not going away

[DFW Horn 6123]

33 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Sometimes fans just leave once they get fucked over.

Count me as a die-hard, Luv Ya Blue, Oilers fan who never embraced the Texans

Fuck the NFL

[Trojan Man 429]

36 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Nothing but anecdotal evidence to the contrary:  I rooted for the St. Louis Cardinals as a kid in the 70s.  Jim Hart, Neil Lomax, Ottis Anderson, Jackie Smith, Conrad Dobler, etc.  They left for Arizona.  I've never rooted for any NFL team since.  Not even the Rams.  I literally could not give a tinker's damn, and they won a Super Bowl.

I kinda keep one eye on the Cowboys because they're on a lot, but I don't put much emotional energy into them, not like any number of Longhorns teams or Cardinals baseball.

Sometimes fans just leave once they get fucked over.

Yep, if we're going the anecdote route I know people who reacted the same way when the Rams left LA.  But that move didn't kill NFL fandom in LA the same way cutting fanbases out of the top level of CFB will kill CFB fandom in their region and among their fanbases.  In the years between LA losing the Rams and LA getting the Rams back I still remember seeing tons of NFL fans at sports bars on Sundays to watch NFL games.  People still talked about the NFL a lot and followed it closely.  The pissed off Rams fans who swore off the NFL after they left town were a minority.

That won't happen with CFB if you cut out every fanbase the networks deem undesirable because CFB is a much more regional sport.  If anything that would boost NFL ratings because that's an outlet for the excluded fanbases to continue getting their football fix, the reverse of what happened with you and DFW Horn.  It's promising CFB's decision makers seem to recognize this at the moment, but I worry greed will eventually change their minds.

[jimmyjazz 45918]

8 minutes ago, Trojan Man said:

Yep, if we're going the anecdote route I know people who reacted the same way when the Rams left LA.  But that move didn't kill NFL fandom in LA the same way cutting fanbases out of the top level of CFB will kill CFB fandom in their region and among their fanbases.  In the years between LA losing the Rams and LA getting the Rams back I still remember seeing tons of NFL fans at sports bars on Sundays to watch NFL games.  People still talked about the NFL a lot and followed it closely.  The pissed off Rams fans who swore off the NFL after they left town were a minority.

Is it possible that LA has more population turnover because of its main industries?  I could see newbie Angelinos just going in whole hog, immersively, with whatever the city has to offer.  Total conjecture, though.

Edited November 24, 2022 by jimmyjazz
speling

[Trojan Man 429]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Is it possible that LA has more population turnover because of its main industries?  I could see newbie Angelinos just going in whole hog, immersively, with whatever the city has to offer.  Total conjecture, though.

LA has tons of transplants, which is another factor that helped overcome losing the Rams and kept LA NFL ratings up without any local teams.  But transplants usually don't become fans of LA teams since most of them already have a team before they move to LA.  Jim from Florida didn't care about losing the Rams because he has been a Dolphins fan his whole life so that helped preserve LA NFL fandom when there was no NFL team in town, but he isn't going to drop the Dolphins for the Chargers or Rams now that both play in LA.  This is a big reason why you always see so many visiting fans at Chargers/Rams home games.

That's another reason NFL fandom is more national and CFB fandom is more regional.  Most NFL teams are in big cities, which have more transplants and population churn just by nature of being large population centers.  That means there will be more general NFL interest in bigger cities.  Most FBS schools are in college towns or midsized cities, which won't have as many transplants or as much population turnover.  That means the football focus there will revolve mostly around the local team and other teams in their conference rather than college football as a whole.  To put it another way, in LA you'll see a dozen Steeler hats for every Penn State hat.  In Pittsburgh you'll see more Rams hats than USC hats.  In State College you won't see any USC or Rams hats.

[jimmyjazz 45918]

All I know is that my sister became a "fan" of the fucking NY Mets in the mid-80s after moving to NYC from St. Louis.

We eventually repaired our relationship after she moved back and got right with God.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

So take this for what it’s worth but I was just told by someone I trust that would know stuff like this that the ACC will dissolve in 2025.  Notre Dame will kick it all off and then the ACC will be gone.  Supposedly, FSU is having an internal fight over where to go.  The big money boosters want SEC and the coach/football program wants Big 10.  

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

Adding, Clemson will go SEC and UNC is looking at Big 10 right now along with Notre Dame.

[DFW Horn 6123]

4 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So take this for what it’s worth but I was just told by someone I trust that would know stuff like this that the ACC will dissolve in 2025.  Notre Dame will kick it all off and then the ACC will be gone.  Supposedly, FSU is having an internal fight over where to go.  The big money boosters want SEC and the coach/football program wants Big 10.  

FSU to the B1G makes WVU to the Big 12 look good, by comparison.

If ND goes to the B1G, I expect the SEC will expand with the obvious ACC candidates; FSU, Clemson, UNC, and UVA.

[Neonmoon 38129]

4 minutes ago, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So take this for what it’s worth but I was just told by someone I trust that would know stuff like this that the ACC will dissolve in 2025.  Notre Dame will kick it all off and then the ACC will be gone.  Supposedly, FSU is having an internal fight over where to go.  The big money boosters want SEC and the coach/football program wants Big 10.  

[Satchel 6938]

Regional rivalries will cease to exist and college football will become a wholly owned subsidiary of the networks with waning fan interest.

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

He just told me its basically locked in at this point and the ACC will soon not exist.  

[billfromlaketravis 11466]

I’d like for the SEC to stay at 16 while the Big Ten becomes some unwieldy NFL minor league. A conference only works with a common regional identity and familiarity with your opponents. 

[Satchel 6938]

20 minutes ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I’d like for the SEC to stay at 16 while the Big Ten becomes some unwieldy NFL minor league. A conference only works with a common regional identity and familiarity with your opponents. 

How could not love Rutgers and Southern Cal?

[DFW Horn 6123]

2 hours ago, Satchel said:

How could not love Rutgers and Southern Cal?

...and UCLA vs Northwestern?

[TKthunder2 4991]

6 hours ago, billfromlaketravis said:

I’d like for the SEC to stay at 16 while the Big Ten becomes some unwieldy NFL minor league. A conference only works with a common regional identity and familiarity with your opponents. 

First I believe this rumor about as far as I have I believe anything put out by the Dude of WV.

Second, I agree with you, but devil’s advocate, Clemson/FSU are already in SEC states, and UNC/UVA are SEC adjacent.

The “Bible Belt” map would basically would align with the proposed SEC. Doesn’t look like a bad setup to me.

Big Ten with Rutgers/Maryland and Nebraska was a stretch. Adding USC/UCLA was logical profit driven insanity but many assumed it was step one in a gradual Westward expansion plan. Grab all 9 of the AAU PAC12 schools and Kansas to go to 24 split into divisions…but if they add in FSU/Miami then they are soulless NFL lite.
 

Adding two adjacent states to the SEC isn’t going to change the fact that the SEC is logistically regional and the Big Ten is stupidly national.

[bullet 1596]

On 11/24/2022 at 3:10 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Nothing but anecdotal evidence to the contrary:  I rooted for the St. Louis Cardinals as a kid in the 70s.  Jim Hart, Neil Lomax, Ottis Anderson, Jackie Smith, Conrad Dobler, etc.  They left for Arizona.  I've never rooted for any NFL team since.  Not even the Rams.  I literally could not give a tinker's damn, and they won a Super Bowl.

I kinda keep one eye on the Cowboys because they're on a lot, but I don't put much emotional energy into them, not like any number of Longhorns teams or Cardinals baseball.

Sometimes fans just leave once they get fucked over.

I switched.  I was first a Colts fan.  No pro football teams near Central Kentucky at the time.  Cowboys my 2nd team since family was from Texas.  Bengals moved up to 2nd when they got the expansion franchise.  Colts traded off or benched, Unitas, Matte, Bubba Smith, Norm Bulaich, etc. and I dropped the Colts, so Bengals and Cowboys moved to 1 and 2.

In basketball I followed the Kentucky Colonels in ABA and Cincinnati Royals in NBA.  Dropped the Royals when they moved to KC.  Colonels got dumped in the merger and I picked up the Rockets as we were back in Texas at the time.

But I do think college is different.  There are alumni ties, not just city ties.  And its not the "top level" like the pros.  Plus the T-shirts who grew up Ole Miss fans just aren't going to start rooting for Alabama if Ole Miss gets left behind.  They'll just root for the Saints and drop college football.

 

[bullet 1596]

On 11/26/2022 at 3:43 PM, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So take this for what it’s worth but I was just told by someone I trust that would know stuff like this that the ACC will dissolve in 2025.  Notre Dame will kick it all off and then the ACC will be gone.  Supposedly, FSU is having an internal fight over where to go.  The big money boosters want SEC and the coach/football program wants Big 10.  

I think there are too many schools nobody would want in the ACC for it to dissolve.  Maybe they make a deal to release a few schools.  But who is going to take Pitt, SU, BC, Louisville, Wake Forest?  And with SEC and Big 10 money being so big now, who would be interested in Georgia Tech or NC St or Duke?

[Hurtlocker 2212]

On 11/24/2022 at 2:52 PM, Trojan Man said:

The Premiere League is a professional league, which is an inaccurate comparison with CFB.  The NFL would be a more accurate comparison.  Professional fandom is more malleable than college fandom for a couple reasons.  Pro sports are more national than college sports so you don't need a local team to feel invested and people tend to have a deeper connection with college teams, making it harder to abandon them or choose a new one to follow (nobody has a framed piece of paper that says "University of Dallas Cowboys" in their office).  When the Rams left LA some of their fans quit watching the NFL but most of them adopted a new team.  There are tons of Cowboys/Packers/Steelers fans around LA and not all of them are from Texas/Wisconsin/Pennsylvania.  In the 20 years between the Rams leaving and the Rams returning NFL fandom stayed strong in LA despite not having a local team because it's a far more national product than CFB.

If USC and UCLA dropped football or never joined the B1G and were relegated to some lesser level of competition while the B1G/SEC went on to make their own league and playoff only playing each other you would not see that same sort of B1G/SEC adoption in LA like there was for the NFL.  College sports in LA would end up like college sports in NYC, where none of the natives give a shit.  Why would smaller fanbases like Purdue's handle being kicked out of the party any differently?  Like I said, you can cast off one small fanbase and survive. You cast off every fanbase after the biggest 24-32 in the sport and that adds up to a big chunk of viewers who will no longer consume your product.

As for those awesome matchups every week, they won't feel so awesome when even the best teams have at least 2-3 losses every year because they replaced all the games they typically win 95% of the time with stiffer competition while the teams that currently win 8-10 games become 4-6 win programs and take a reputation hit.  No more 11-0 Michigan vs 11-0 Ohio State or 12-0 Georgia vs 11-1 Alabama (last year's SEC CCG) after you replace the bottom half of each team's schedule with top 25ish teams.  This is where the chiefs need the indians.  The indians eat losses and inflate records for the chiefs, the indians get paid to be a punching bag that dreams about the once in a generation dream season where they become a power, the chiefs feel good about winning 10-12 games, the indians tune in to watch the chiefs play each other.

This.  If you think the nation is going to rally behind 3 loss LSU or 2 loss Clemson, just because they play bigger brands, you're really missing how brands get built in the first place.    Wins is everything.   And in the new Big Ten and SEC there are some brands that will multiply their appeal, but many who will see it evaporate too as success fades.   Ask Colorado or Nebraska how it doesn't matter to lose to different teams.

Having a brand and playing other brands helps the regular season, in regard to how much it pays out.    It doesn't mean losses don't matter.   In this new playoff format, you'll see the Big Ten and SEC get 3 teams in constantly, but it will come off the backs of 13 who don't.   Meanwhile six teams in other conferences will find themselves in the position of drinking from a marketing firehose.

[Texas Wahoo 3395]

On 11/26/2022 at 3:53 PM, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

He just told me its basically locked in at this point and the ACC will soon not exist.  

Maybe I could buy all the teams you mentioned leaving, but that still leaves more than 10 teams with no better options. The ACC will still exist for the same reason as the Big XII. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

48 minutes ago, bullet said:

I think there are too many schools nobody would want in the ACC for it to dissolve.  Maybe they make a deal to release a few schools.  But who is going to take Pitt, SU, BC, Louisville, Wake Forest?  And with SEC and Big 10 money being so big now, who would be interested in Georgia Tech or NC St or Duke?

Not to mention the fact that, outside ND, I don't think there is a single property in the ACC, much like the Pac or Big 12, that commands $75m, let alone 100m.  

They may be able to get close with a UVA/UNC/GTech/FSU, but only because of BTN - and 60% of that is Fox's now.   That would net them four rapidly growing states, but the only major DMA is Atlanta, which is half of LA's.   If it didn't make sense to grab NoCal, which is bigger than Atlanta, then why would this make sense?   

[DCLonghorn 244]

13 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Not to mention the fact that, outside ND, I don't think there is a single property in the ACC, much like the Pac or Big 12, that commands $75m, let alone 100m.  

They may be able to get close with a UVA/UNC/GTech/FSU, but only because of BTN - and 60% of that is Fox's now.   That would net them four rapidly growing states, but the only major DMA is Atlanta, which is half of LA's.   If it didn't make sense to grab NoCal, which is bigger than Atlanta, then why would this make sense?   

After 475 pages, I dont think it's appropriate for you to try and change the nature and direction of this thread! "Make sense?!" Come on man! 

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

IF the ACC actually did dissolve, I'd think schools like Louisville, Pitt, and Cuse would be in the Big 12 almost immediately.  Especially with the new Big 12's focus on hoops.

If you have ND/UVA/UNC/GA Tech in the Big 10, and FSU/VA Tech/Miami/Clemson in the SEC, then I would think Pitt/Louisville/Syracuse/NCSU would join the Big 12.

[Dnaguy 11953]

I'd rather have NC state in the SEC than Miami.

With Florida and FSU, why would the SEC want Miami? 

NC State is less of a brand, but at least is geographically important due to the demographic growth of North Carolina.

Switch those two, and add Duke to the Big 12 and I think that'll be how it shakes out.

I'm too lazy to count.. so I don't know if that makes the Big12 even number of teams or not.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

6 minutes ago, Dnaguy said:

I'd rather have NC state in the SEC than Miami.

With Florida and FSU, why would the SEC want Miami? 

NC State is less of a brand, but at least is geographically important due to the demographic growth of North Carolina.

Switch those two, and add Duke to the Big 12 and I think that'll be how it shakes out.

I'm too lazy to count.. so I don't know if that makes the Big12 even number of teams or not.

I'm just kind of shuffling the ACC around where it sort of makes sense.

I think FSU and Clemson are obvious SEC choices.  Maybe they'd just leave it there?  IDK.  I'm just assuming they go to 20.  VA Tech and NCSU would make more sense from a market stand point.  I do agree that if UNC leaves Duke, that Duke would end up in the Big 12 due to hoops.

[Crockett 490]

On 11/24/2022 at 8:58 AM, slorch said:

In a realignment thread, you assholes are badmouthing the rest of the league... and someone says, "Don't let the door hit you in the ass"

and the neggers come out.  Every single one of them is an endorsement of your own fanbase's bitchassedness.

Keep em coming.

I don't start shit, but wholly fuck, don't get all  bent out of shape when someone responds.

[tonedeaf 56]

On 11/24/2022 at 2:10 PM, jimmyjazz said:

Nothing but anecdotal evidence to the contrary:  I rooted for the St. Louis Cardinals as a kid in the 70s.  Jim Hart, Neil Lomax, Ottis Anderson, Jackie Smith, Conrad Dobler, etc.  They left for Arizona.  I've never rooted for any NFL team since.  Not even the Rams.  I literally could not give a tinker's damn, and they won a Super Bowl.

I kinda keep one eye on the Cowboys because they're on a lot, but I don't put much emotional energy into them, not like any number of Longhorns teams or Cardinals baseball.

Sometimes fans just leave once they get fucked over.

Conrad was a mean MF. 😁

[notre dame joe 187]

On 11/26/2022 at 1:43 PM, Beantown Express 2.0 said:

So take this for what it’s worth but I was just told by someone I trust that would know stuff like this that the ACC will dissolve in 2025.  Notre Dame will kick it all off and then the ACC will be gone.  Supposedly, FSU is having an internal fight over where to go.  The big money boosters want SEC and the coach/football program wants Big 10.  

Your source told you that Mike Norvell was being consulted on their conference move?

[Beantown Express 2.0 6559]

7 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

Your source told you that Mike Norvell was being consulted on their conference move?

He said people in the football program so I figured the coach and AD and people within the school system but he didn’t say the coach specifically. 

[closetohumping 17440]

8 hours ago, notre dame joe said:

Your source told you that Mike Norvell was being consulted on their conference move?

That wouldn't shock me. I'd bet the HC of the major sports will know about it.  Allegedly it was a reason Mulkey left for LSU.  She got wind of our move and bailed.

[Hurtlocker 2212]

On 11/28/2022 at 10:03 AM, DCLonghorn said:

After 475 pages, I dont think it's appropriate for you to try and change the nature and direction of this thread! "Make sense?!" Come on man! 

[mdleast 8289]

For your consideration. I’ll hang up and listen.

[utee94 15820]

Screw Miami, they belong in the green conference, not ours.

 

[JFKFC 4878]

On 11/26/2022 at 4:34 PM, billfromlaketravis said:

A conference only works with a common regional identity and familiarity with your opponents. 

Those days are over.

This is all leading to 2 super conferences and having only their champions play for the national title. Talking about anything else is just goat shit on an aggie condom. 

[Hurtlocker 2212]

Can't find the damn ratings thread, so I'll put it in this catchall as its basically the reason for realignment any more:

Couple notes:

• Big Brands helped the SEC and B1G, that's why you get them
• A great game helped the Big 12.   The closer the game is at the end, with highly ranked teams, with something on the line, explodes audiences
• Friday is just not good to the PAC, neither is a blow out
• The ACC is closer to the AAC in numbers than the Pac

The Numbers:

Here's the difference in spread between the SEC, in number one, and each position below:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller audience
• B12 - 14.68% smaller 
• PAC - 53.30% smaller
• ACC - 125.98% smaller
• AAC - 239.08% smaller
• MWC - 335.66% smaller

Here's the difference in spread between the place directly above:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller than SEC audience
• B12 - 12.02% smaller than B1G
• PAC - 36.61% smaller than B12
• ACC - 41.90% smaller than PAC
• AAC - 22.27% smaller than ACC
• MWC - 28.09% smaller than AAC

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

3 minutes ago, Hurtlocker said:

Can't find the damn ratings thread, so I'll put it in this catchall as its basically the reason for realignment any more:

Couple notes:

• Big Brands helped the SEC and B1G, that's why you get them
• A great game helped the Big 12.   The closer the game is at the end, with highly ranked teams, with something on the line, explodes audiences
• Friday is just not good to the PAC, neither is a blow out
• The ACC is closer to the AAC in numbers than the Pac

The Numbers:

Here's the difference in spread between the SEC, in number one, and each position below:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller audience
• B12 - 14.68% smaller 
• PAC - 53.30% smaller
• ACC - 125.98% smaller
• AAC - 239.08% smaller
• MWC - 335.66% smaller

Here's the difference in spread between the place directly above:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller than SEC audience
• B12 - 12.02% smaller than B1G
• PAC - 36.61% smaller than B12
• ACC - 41.90% smaller than PAC
• AAC - 22.27% smaller than ACC
• MWC - 28.09% smaller than AAC

That's really the new Big 12's niche.  It doesn't have the brands of the Big 10 and SEC, but it's a lot more entertaining than the Pac 12 and ACC.

['stache 21813]

Yup, and its not like they're a bunch of unknowns. TCU isn't a Central Michigan having a big year that one time, TCU, KSU, OKST, Baylor, these are programs that people who follow college football know and recognize (just naming the last four title game participants). Only 2 million (12%) short of the SEC and eclipsing 8 million two straight years without OU or Texas is a great sign going forward.  

[Valmy77 13226]

2 minutes ago, 'stache said:

Yup, and its not like they're a bunch of unknowns. TCU isn't a Central Michigan having a big year that one time, TCU, KSU, OKST, Baylor, these are programs that people who follow college football know and recognize (just naming the last four title game participants). Only 2 million (12%) short of the SEC and eclipsing 8 million two straight years without OU or Texas is a great sign going forward.  

Yeah. You will be fine without us. We weren't providing much value going 7-5 or 8-4 (if we were lucky) every year anyway.

['stache 21813]

8 minutes ago, Valmy77 said:

Yeah. You will be fine without us. We weren't providing much value going 7-5 or 8-4 (if we were lucky) every year anyway.

I mean, our annual payouts are about to be half of yours and Rutgers, so of course we're losing significant value. But at least we'll remain relevant with sufficient funds to be competitive on the field and in the ratings. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by 'stache

[The Hot Dog Buffet 1291]

The timing of playoff expansion is what will ultimately save the Big 12. Some of the non-brands will become a lot more marketable when they start making the playoffs with some regularity. With a field of 12, they probably get 2 bids more often than not.

[Valmy77 13226]

1 minute ago, 'stache said:

I mean, our annual payouts are about to be half of yours and Rutgers, so of course we're losing significant value. But at least we'll remain relevant with sufficient funds to be competitive on the field and in the ratings. 

You will be.

Our annual payouts in the Big 12 just were not sustainable, that is why we had to move.

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

12 minutes ago, 'stache said:

I mean, our annual payouts are about to be half of yours and Rutgers, so of course we're losing significant value. But at least we'll remain relevant with sufficient funds to be competitive on the field and in the ratings. 

Exactly.  And this is what most of us wanted at the end of the day, and am quite pleased to have.

12 minutes ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

The timing of playoff expansion is what will ultimately save the Big 12. Some of the non-brands will become a lot more marketable when they start making the playoffs with some regularity. With a field of 12, they probably get 2 bids more often than not.

This is also very much true.  Keeping a 4 team playoff would have put the Big 12 in a much worse position.  There are going to be a lot of years that both of the teams in the Big 12 CCG are inside the top 12 and will make the 12 team playoff.  And in the years there aren't, we still have the one guaranteed slot.

[statsman 5462]

It’s very clear y’all will be better off without UT and OU. You really need your administrations to push Texas and OU out as soon as possible 

['stache 21813]

For the billionth time, it's the networks that are holding it up, even if you paid the buyout tomorrow. With both the USC/UCLA move and now the playoff expansion for 2024, it's almost certain they'll work it out for the move a year early in 2024. 

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

32 minutes ago, statsman said:

It’s very clear y’all will be better off without UT and OU. You really need your administrations to push Texas and OU out as soon as possible 

We (the people posting in here) all want that.  

I think everyone's still holding out hope that the 2023 schedule is being delayed as a result of some last minute negotiating. 

Edited December 6, 2022 by Al_4_ISU

[BurntOrange&White 39931]

37 minutes ago, 'stache said:

For the billionth time, it's the networks that are holding it up, even if you paid the buyout tomorrow. With both the USC/UCLA move and now the playoff expansion for 2024, it's almost certain they'll work it out for the move a year early in 2024. 

Shut up bitch, you're a big 12 conference member.

8 minutes ago, Al_4_ISU said:

We (the people posting in here) all want that.  

I think everyone's still holding out hope that the 2023 schedule is being delayed as a result of some last minute negotiating. 

And you are too. 

 

[Al_4_ISU 12463]

1 minute ago, BurntOrange&White said:

Shut up bitch, you're a big 12 conference member.

And you are too. 

 

Are you saying that stache and I are personally refusing to lower the UT/OU buyout?

[66BUFF 2562]

1 hour ago, Al_4_ISU said:

Are you saying that stache and I are personally refusing to lower the UT/OU buyout?

[bullet 1596]

5 hours ago, Hurtlocker said:

Can't find the damn ratings thread, so I'll put it in this catchall as its basically the reason for realignment any more:

Couple notes:

• Big Brands helped the SEC and B1G, that's why you get them
• A great game helped the Big 12.   The closer the game is at the end, with highly ranked teams, with something on the line, explodes audiences
• Friday is just not good to the PAC, neither is a blow out
• The ACC is closer to the AAC in numbers than the Pac

The Numbers:

Here's the difference in spread between the SEC, in number one, and each position below:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller audience
• B12 - 14.68% smaller 
• PAC - 53.30% smaller
• ACC - 125.98% smaller
• AAC - 239.08% smaller
• MWC - 335.66% smaller

Here's the difference in spread between the place directly above:

• B1G - 2.59% smaller than SEC audience
• B12 - 12.02% smaller than B1G
• PAC - 36.61% smaller than B12
• ACC - 41.90% smaller than PAC
• AAC - 22.27% smaller than ACC
• MWC - 28.09% smaller than AAC

Notably, the AAC wasn't far behind the ACC despite the ACC having two well known programs and the AAC having Tulane play opposite LSU and the SEC CCG.  The ACC was opposite the Big 10 game which wasn't expected to be competitive.

['stache 21813]

Pretty impressive overall.

[FartingDreamer 138]

The Big 12 is going to be just fine.